Filed: Jun. 13, 2016
Latest Update: Jun. 13, 2016
Summary: ORDER REGARDING DAUBERT MOTIONS AND MOTIONS IN LIMINE FOR CASES SUBJECT TO REMAND JON S. TIGAR , District Judge . It appears that at least one of the remaining Daubert motions may relate only to cases that will eventually be remanded for trial. See ECF No. 3176. The Court will not decide, and will defer to the transferor court on remand, any motion in limine that affects only a case that will eventually be remanded back to a transferor court for trial. 1 See Bouchard v.
Summary: ORDER REGARDING DAUBERT MOTIONS AND MOTIONS IN LIMINE FOR CASES SUBJECT TO REMAND JON S. TIGAR , District Judge . It appears that at least one of the remaining Daubert motions may relate only to cases that will eventually be remanded for trial. See ECF No. 3176. The Court will not decide, and will defer to the transferor court on remand, any motion in limine that affects only a case that will eventually be remanded back to a transferor court for trial. 1 See Bouchard v. C..
More
ORDER REGARDING DAUBERT MOTIONS AND MOTIONS IN LIMINE FOR CASES SUBJECT TO REMAND
JON S. TIGAR, District Judge.
It appears that at least one of the remaining Daubert motions may relate only to cases that will eventually be remanded for trial. See ECF No. 3176. The Court will not decide, and will defer to the transferor court on remand, any motion in limine that affects only a case that will eventually be remanded back to a transferor court for trial.1 See Bouchard v. CBS Corp., No. 11-00458, 2012 WL 5462612, at *1 (E.D. Pa. Oct. 2, 2012) (concluding that "the ruling Defendant seeks is a matter better handled by the trial judge in the context of a motion in limine"); In re Sears, Roebuck & Co. Tools Mktg. & Sales Practices Litig., No. 05 C 4742, 2012 WL 3961295, at *1 (N.D. Ill. Sept. 10, 2012) (entering a suggestion of remand because, in part, the "only `pretrial motions' we can anticipate at this point would relate to the manner in which the case would be tried, such as motions in limine"); In re Cobra Tax Shelters Litig., No. 1:05ML9727WTLTAB, 2009 WL 1010422, at *1 (S.D. Ind. Apr. 14, 2009) ("It is the Court's view that the pending motions in limine on the admissibility of expert testimony would be best resolved by the court that ultimately tries this case."); see also M. Hugo & S. Helinski, 1 Litigating Tort Cases § 8:72 (online ed. 2015) ("Because the subject of motions in limine surround trial matters, the appropriate time to bring such motions is after remand to the transferor court — the trial court."
Accordingly, the Court orders the parties to submit a joint filing by June 20, 2016, identifying any Daubert motion or motion in limine still pending which relates only to a case or cases subject to remand. Any party who believes that the undersigned should decide any motion on that list may so request and may submit a short explanation in support of that request. Parties should not discuss the timing of remand in this joint filing.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
